Friday, 3 May 2019

Government is entitled to impose limitations on the right
to demonstrate by citizens because such right does not take away other rights
that are enshrined in the law, a top official has said.

Information, Publicity and Broadcasting Services secretary,
Mr Nick Mangwana said in an editorial we publish today that it was the
responsibility and duty of any government to ensure the protection of its
citizens and all that fell within its jurisdiction.

Mr Mangwana said this while writing in his weekly column in
The Herald.

“The disconcerting thing about the human rights regimes is
the tacit belief that the right to protest, petition or demonstrate has
supremacy over any other right enshrined in our Constitution. This is not only
erroneous, but quite defective.

“In any country under the sun, the right to protest,
demonstrate or petition has caveats and does not trump all other rights. In fact
there are safeguards to that right. In Zimbabwe, those safeguards are currently
legislated in the Public Order and Security Act (POSA),” said Mr Mangwana.

His statement coincides with a recent call by MDC-Alliance
president Mr Nelson Chamisa where he threatened to call for mass demonstrations
in protest of sanctions-induced economic challenges.

In January, several innocent people were forced to join a
demonstration organised by civic society and the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade
Unions which resulted in deaths of people and left a trail of destruction of
property.

Mr Mangwana said the current legal reforms aimed at
managing public gatherings were not unique from other countries, but were more
liberal.

He was referring to the proposed repeal of POSA and
replacing it with a recently gazetted Maintenance of Peace and Order Bill which
Mr Mangwana said was meant to benchmark it with countries considered as beacons
of democracy.

“The raison d’être of this Bill is to repeal POSA and
replace it with this Bill which is aligned to the Constitution as well as to
modernise the management of public gatherings in adopting modern ideas and
benchmark them with best practices in countries considered as the beacons of
democracy,” said Mr Mangwana.

He said Zimbabwe’s legislation giving effect on the right
to freedom of expression ranked competitively well if not better than those
countries regarded as the best in the world like England, Wales, United States
and South Africa among others.

“The Zimbabwean Government gazetted Maintenance of Order
Peace Bill whose Section 7 is not any different from its UK applicable
counterpart, but with the Zimbabwean one being much more liberal. To follow
logic from certain circles, it means that Zimbabwe has come up with a Bill that
is much more democratic than that one in England and Wales,” said Mr Mangwana.

He said in countries like England and Wales, the police
could specify or limit the number of people that could participate in a
demonstration.

“Right now in Zimbabwe, there are those who are threatening
community life by brandishing ‘crippling demonstrations’. In that they are
threatening to bring mayhem to those that would have chosen not to participate.

“To use the language used by the British in their law, they
are threatening to ‘cause a serious disruption to the life of the community,’”
said Mr Mangwana.

“When one looks at all these provisions, it is clear that
Zimbabwe is one of the most liberal country in the world on paper.” Herald